skill-status

Show where you are in the workflow and what to do next — use for progress checks and orientation

Quality

59%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/skill-status/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

60%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The body is highly actionable — concrete commands, exact output formats, routing tables, and worked examples — with a clearly phased workflow and an explicit stop-point. Its weaknesses are material duplication (the not-initialized template, best-practices, and routing guidance each appear twice or more), a Phase 6 that breaks the numbered phase sequence, and progressive disclosure failures: it instructs the agent to run scripts and read files that are not in the bundle while inlining long example content that belongs in separate reference files.

Suggestions

Resolve the broken bundle references: either ship scripts/octo-state.sh and skills/blocks/codex-host-adapter.md in the bundle, or replace the ./scripts/octo-state.sh invocations with self-contained bash (e.g. parsing .octo/STATE.md directly) so the guidance is executable as bundled.

Deduplicate: delete Example 1 (verbatim repeat of the Phase 1 not-initialized template), fold 'Best Practices' §§1-2 into their originating phases, and keep phase-specific routing in one place (Phase 5 Step 2) with examples referencing it — cutting roughly 100 lines.

Move the three full example outputs into a single references/examples.md with clearly signaled links ('**Examples**: See [examples.md](references/examples.md)'), and relocate Phase 6 to its correct numeric position (or renumber it) so the phase sequence reads 1-6 in order.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The Phase-1 'Not initialized' template (lines 55-75) is repeated nearly verbatim in Example 1, 'Best Practices' §§1-2 restate the Phase 1 bash check and octo-state.sh command already given, and phase-specific routing appears in the routing table, Phase 5 Step 2, and Example 2 — more than 'minor instances' of over-explanation, so anchor 3 fits better than anchor 4.	3 / 5
Actionability	Concrete copy-paste bash (octo-state.sh read_state, git log/branch/tag commands), an exact expected output format, routing tables, and three full worked examples covering the common cases (not initialized, active, blocked) match 'mostly executable guidance'; minor gaps — the {blockers} placeholder has no step explaining how blockers are extracted, and the referenced scripts do not exist in the bundle — keep it below anchor 5.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The phased sequence (check init → read state → read roadmap → display → route) is clearly ordered with an explicit stop-point ('Stop here - do not proceed to Phase 2') after the existence check, matching 'clear sequence with most checkpoints present'; minor gaps — no handling for read_state failing or malformed output, and Phase 6 appearing out of numeric order after 'Example Outputs' — keep it below anchor 5.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The bundle contains only SKILL.md (no scripts/, references/, or assets/), yet the body directs the reader to ./scripts/octo-state.sh (three times) and skills/blocks/codex-host-adapter.md — files that do not exist — while ~150 lines of example outputs and routing tables are inlined in a 486-line monolith. Section headers are good, but the broken cross-file structure and heavy inlining place this noticeably below the midpoint, between anchors 2 and 3.	2 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Description

58%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description is concise, in third person, and answers both what and when with an explicit 'use for' clause, but it undersells the skill's concrete capabilities and misses the natural trigger phrases ('status', 'what's next', 'show me progress') that the body's own When-to-Use section demonstrates users will say. It sits solidly at the middle of the rubric with a clear niche that is only weakly signaled.

Suggestions

Enumerate the concrete capabilities: e.g. 'Display a project status dashboard with roadmap progress, blockers, and next-action routing from workflow state. Use when the user asks "What's the status?", "Where am I in the workflow?", "What should I do next?", or asks about blockers.'

Add the natural trigger synonyms users will actually say — 'status', 'show me progress', 'what's next', 'any blockers' — which are already listed in the body's When-to-Use section but absent from the description.

Sharpen the niche by tying triggers to the project-workflow context (e.g. '.octo project state') so it does not compete with generic task-management or orientation skills.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	"Show where you are in the workflow and what to do next" names the domain and 1-2 concrete actions but omits the skill's actual capabilities (status dashboard, roadmap progress, blockers, next-action routing), matching the 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive' anchor rather than the 'several specific actions' anchor above.	3 / 5
Completeness	It answers both 'what' ("Show where you are in the workflow and what to do next") and 'when' via the explicit "use for progress checks and orientation" clause, but the 'when' lacks concrete trigger phrases like "What's the status?" or "Show me progress", so it fits the 'both present, when could be more explicit' anchor rather than the fully explicit anchor 5.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	"progress checks", "orientation", "where you are", and "what to do next" are natural phrases, but common variations the body itself lists as triggers — "status", "what's next", "show me progress", "blockers" — are absent, fitting the 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms' anchor.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	"where you are in the workflow" is a recognizable niche, but "progress checks and orientation" is broad and could overlap with task-management, planning, or onboarding skills, matching 'somewhat specific but could still overlap with similar skills' rather than the 'mostly distinct' anchor.	3 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: nyldn/claude-octopus
Path: skills/skill-status/SKILL.md
Commit: 0093dab

Reviewed: 5 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.